2010...his last great showing at a Slam as he won the AO and lost in the QF and SF stages for the 3 remaining Slams.

2011...made 1 final, lost the rest in the QF and SF stages.

Yet Federer and his fans still remain upbeat about his chances of winning more Slams and regaining the #1 ranking.:-?

I know he's in great health but how does he plan on winning anything with the likes of Djokovic and Nadal in his way? He can't beat them both back to back in a Slam. Even Federer fans know that.

Click to expand...

Yes, he gets worse. But I don't think the 2010 Federer was much better than the 2011 Federer. Both were worse than 2004-2007, but 2010-2011 Federer, and 2012, still has the chance, of winning one and maybe two slams before retirement. Doesn't mean he will, but he can. That's it.
Winning one slam, making a final or two, and winning some masters, can push him to #1 if we have a year where nobody dominates. Just like it used to happen in the past before the Federer era.

I think if Roger was to have one year where he makes a one final big push for greatness then it's 2012. Yep, his decline will continue and honestly I see him winning maybe 1 final slam or maybe 0, neither would surprise me.

Fed has been in decline ever since 2008. I know there are certain fans having come up with whatever excuses you can think of - you name it, mono (yes it had its influence, but just don't exaggerate it), "he doesn't care anymore", etc.

Fact is, no player stays on top forever, and Fed has already done an awesome job when it comes to consistency. He's dropped a few paces by now, such should be obvious. But as long as he remains in the top #4, he'll remain a contender for yet another slam title. Never count out a great champion like he is.

That said, even if he will remain at 16 GS titles, Fed fans will have nothing to complain about. I am just very happy that his decline seems to be a very gradual one, and am hoping for some late brilliancy from him in what might well be his last season.

It's the opposite actually. Federer has been improving each year. His footwork is what he's improved the most and this has translated into less errors in his game. The problem is guys like Nadal, Murray & Djokovic from Tsonga to Soderling have also been improving. Chumps like Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Agassi, Nalbandian provided no challenege for Federer - hence why Federer struggles to beat guys as talented as himself (because he was caught off guard and couldn't deal with sudden challenges after playing chumps for years).

One of the things that Federer has improved the most is the forehand. Yep, it's not as strong as Djokovic's, Nadal's of Murray's but it's definately in the league just behind it (with Tsonga and Soderling) . Murray I think beats Federer in the forehand department simply because of the angles he can produce.

His backhand is as good as it was when Federer was supposedly better than ever (rofl....to think Federer's 05 level of play trumps 08+).

His serve has also improved, it's now a weapon singularly now.

His return....His return has improved. Guys like Roddick have good serves, but the game has improved on so many levels, Federer can break Roddick two or three times back in 05 but there are so many better servers (and players come to think of it) than Roddick. Someone like Tsonga is one - Federer was hopeless against him at Wimbledon due to Tsonga's serving ability. So again, Federer's return is good and was good against the average servers but not against the brilliance of the current generation.

To summarise, Federer is playing his best tennis ever each passing year and continues to improve. The fact is so are others who can play at a level as high as Federer. Federer didn't benefit from playing mediocre opponents and is now paying the price for it by not being able to step up to challeneges.

Federer's 2011 level would have seen him win all four slams in 2004 and 2005. Maybe even 2006 and 2007.

Yes, he's declining. But when you're 30, there's not much to improve right.

We're still upbeat because if you look at the past year, it took an oustanding efforts from Djokovic, Nadal, and Tsonga to beat him. He still gives himself numerous chances and his losses were literally decided by a few points.

Besides, I think the majority of Federer fans just love to see him play. I know I'll be in tears the day he decides to retire and the thought of tennis without Federer is difficult to fathom. He's achieved everything there is so there's not much left but to enjoy the game.

Let's just enjoy what's left of this great champion's illustrious career!

Are you joking? Your name is obviously Crazy man for a reason.
"One of the things that Federer has improved the most is the forehand. Yep, it's not as strong as Djokovic's, Nadal's of Murray's but it's definately in the league just behind it (with Tsonga and Soderling) . Murray I think beats Federer in the forehand department simply because of the angles he can produce."

Federer has the best forehand in tennis - noone is close. End of discussion.

Maybe you don't understand that he is essentially the only player that, as Nadal has said in his book, can "make winners from nothing".

From a consistency point of view you could say those 3 are better, but not "overall".

Are you joking? Your name is obviously Crazy man for a reason.
"One of the things that Federer has improved the most is the forehand. Yep, it's not as strong as Djokovic's, Nadal's of Murray's but it's definately in the league just behind it (with Tsonga and Soderling) . Murray I think beats Federer in the forehand department simply because of the angles he can produce."

Federer has the best forehand in tennis - noone is close. End of discussion.

Maybe you don't understand that he is essentially the only player that, as Nadal has said in his book, can "make winners from nothing".

From a consistency point of view you could say those 3 are better, but not "overall".

Click to expand...

Murray (among others) can play tennis at a level as high, if not, higher than Federer. Federer is getting better every year, n00b! As for the forehand, that can be said with my first statement.

As a Fedophile, I will be honest in my disappointment that '11 represented the end of his 8-year run with one or more major titles. Fed was there but Djok raised and called. Yet, there's reason to expect better results in '12. The intensity of the Djokdal rivalry may have taken the wind out of both their sails. Also, the Fed'Cone connection has had another full year to gel. Obviously, '12 is gonna be a huge year to steer direction for the rest of Fed's career. Victory in Victoria would go a long way to establishing that this season is not a swan song campaign. Stay tuned.

As a Fedophile, I will be honest in my disappointment that '11 represented the end of his 8-year run with one or more major titles. Fed was there but Djok raised and called. Yet, there's reason to expect better results in '12. The intensity of the Djokdal rivalry may have taken the wind out of both their sails. Also, the Fed'Cone connection has had another full year to gel. Obviously, '12 is gonna be a huge year to steer direction for the rest of Fed's career. Victory in Victoria would go a long way to establishing that this season is not a swan song campaign. Stay tuned.

There are tons of examples. 5-1 final set against Tsonga a couple years ago in Montreal. Tsonga won the final set 7-6. Anyone with half a brain can see that he was not trying.

You are arguing for the wrong guy. Djokovic is a much better player than Murray, and Djoko had problems with Fed while in God mode. Ask Andy Murray whos forehand he would rather have - his or Roger's.

Click to expand...

Why would you give up at 5-1 up? Most people would give up at 1-5 down don't you think. Also, Federer would have given up after that tiebreak; Not decide to suddenly tank at 5-1 up. Tsonga played at a higher level that day. Gosh, people are so sensitive when faced with the truth.

Murray would say he'd rather have Federer's forehand out of respect to Federer. But behind closed doors, he'd take his own.

Murray would say he'd rather have Federer's forehand out of respect to Federer. But behind closed doors, he'd take his own.

Click to expand...

Its funny you are arguing this because Murray has one of the best backhands, defense, and movement - but not even one tennis fan in the world would consider Murray's forehand even top 5 in the ATP, and here you are saying it is better than Federer's.

Its funny you are arguing this because Murray has one of the best backhands, defense, and movement - but not even one tennis fan in the world would consider Murray's forehand even top 5 in the ATP, and here you are saying it is better than Federer's.

Here is an entire match. Murray is just playing defense most of the time BECAUSE of Federer's forehand.

Click to expand...

Ok I am going to put you out of your misery now and say I was being sarcastic on all counts. I'm trying to take the p!ss out of idiots who believe that players today are better than ever (which is clearly not the case) whilst trying to make others rage. I'm sorry you were the guy this time. I just wanted to have fun.

Ok I am going to put you out of your misery now and say I was being sarcastic on all counts. I'm trying to take the p!ss out of idiots who believe that players today are better than ever (which is clearly not the case) whilst trying to make others rage. I'm sorry you were the guy this time. I just wanted to have fun.

2011 was more consistent, less brilliance. I actually think he played better this year, was unfortunate to not get to #2 due to draws

Click to expand...

Unfortunate? Fed choked in one GS semifinal and in a final as well.
He was rather lucky to eventually grab back the #3 spot, all Murray had to do was just win one match at the WTF, and he wouldn't have let that spot go.

OP, you asked a good question. I thought about the same question while driving this late evening. I am a his fan but honestly, his chance of winning is a bit less than of his previous success. The fact is he is aging. New guns ( like Sobad mentioned in another thread) might have the better chance of winning slams.

2011 felt better than 2010, mainly because Federer was the first person to defeat Novak Djokovic, and he did it in a slam. No slam titles but...he has that 3 tournament winning streak going. He also won Paris, accomplishing something he had never done in any other year in his career. So AO seems promising. But ya know...probably another semi and a loss to Nadal or Djokovic..lol.

2011 felt better than 2010, mainly because Federer was the first person to defeat Novak Djokovic, and he did it in a slam. No slam titles but...he has that 3 tournament winning streak going. He also won Paris, accomplishing something he had never done in any other year in his career. So AO seems promising. But ya know...probably another semi and a loss to Nadal or Djokovic..lol.

Click to expand...

Yeah, gotta agree here. His level in 2011 just felt a lot higher than 2010. Last year, between the Australian Open and Toronto, it was just a string of early-round losses for Roger. He lost early to Baghdatis and Berdych in Indian Wells and Miami, lost early in Rome and Estoril, made a final in Madrid, quarters at RG, lost to Hewitt at Halle, and then the disaster that was Wimbledon 2010. Last year's Wimbledon was probably one of the lowest points in Roger's career, probably along with Wimbledon 2008 and early 2009.

Even though he didn't win a slam in 2011, Roger played with much more consistency. His partnership with Annacone has no doubt helped him play more aggressively consistently. He went deeper into most tournaments compared to last year. And in the slams, he just barely lost in all four of losses.

Of course he gives a 'crap' about MS events. He just doesn't care about them as much as Slams which is the same for every other player given that the Slams are the supreme events on the tour! He cared enough to produce some of his best tennis to finish this season by winning Basel and Paris and the former is only a 500 event!

When has he ever 'quit' an MS event that he has ever played? Whenever Federer plays a match, he plays to win it no matter where it may be. He may not always produce his best tennis but he has never tanked a match in his life. To suggest otherwise would be grossly insulting to him.

Just read what Murray has said after GS events they played - "Federer is a different player in Grand Slams".

Click to expand...

Well, I daresay everyone is a different player in Slams precisely because they (and Davis Cup) are the only men's tourneys that still play best of 5 sets rather than best of 3. Federer is undeniably good in best of 5 matches probably because he has had much more experience of playing them than someone like Murray has (in Fed's prime most MS events too were in best of 5 format).

Unfortunate? Fed choked in one GS semifinal and in a final as well.
He was rather lucky to eventually grab back the #3 spot, all Murray had to do was just win one match at the WTF, and he wouldn't have let that spot go.

Click to expand...

No. Murray is almost 800 points behind Federer at the moment, which means he would have needed to qualify for the WTF final to keep the #3 spot.

As for the rest, I also thought that Federer was better (ie more consistent) in 2011 than in 2010, but things didn't go his way. Now, he's 30 and is a slower mover than before, but he's trying to compensate by slightly changing his game, and you should never rule out a champion of his caliber. I mean, Sampras was outside the top 10 at the end of 2001, and that didn't prevent him winning the US Open 2002 (yeah, I know, that was a weak era when you could win a GS by playing a single top 5, blablabla). People have been underestimating Federer (and pushing him towards retirement) since 2008, and he hasn't been too shaby since then for a grandad...

My bet is that he still has a couple of slams (plural) in him, but will be win them? Depends on several factors, so we'll see. 2012 sure is shaping up to be an interesting year, though.

He may not always produce his best tennis but he has never tanked a match in his life. To suggest otherwise would be grossly insulting to him.

Click to expand...

I guess I'm grossly insulting him then, I don't for a moment believe that any of the top players never tanked a match in their career(they're not saints) though that term (tanking) is overused on this forum at times.

Federer is undeniably good in best of 5 matches probably because he has had much more experience of playing them than someone like Murray has (in Fed's prime most MS events too were in best of 5 format).

Click to expand...

I don't think merely "good" cuts it, he has the record # of slams for the open era (and that insane GS SF streak) which makes him one of the best and most consistent slam players of all time.

I also don't think it just boils down to experience, there are a lot of other factors involved, every player is different and has his own path.

On the other hand, Jimmy Connors won Wimbledon and USO when he was 30, got another USO tritle when he was 31, performed at his best at RG when he was 32 and 33, reached his last slam semifinal when he was 39. His last victims were a Top 100 player, 21 years younger than Connors, and a Top 50 player, 13 years younger than Connors. He beat then when he was 3 months shy of his 43d birthday.

Andre Agassi won his last slam when he was 33 with all his crippled back and bad foot.

Sampras won his last slam at 31 having a back injury, a shoulder injury and a congenital blood disease.

Federer doesn't have any chronic injuries, nor bad diseases. He may stay on the tour for several more years and win something which was proved by the end of this year: he won 3 tournaments, his WTF is either a record breaker or he is tied with Guillermo VIlas (don't remember), and he won Paris Masters for the first time.

No he's not getting any better but if he still hangs in there, he will still have opportunities to win another slam or 2 as the players above him tend to overexert therefore will need to rest and that's when Federer can take his chances.

Fed has been in decline ever since 2008. I know there are certain fans having come up with whatever excuses you can think of - you name it, mono (yes it had its influence, but just don't exaggerate it), "he doesn't care anymore", etc.

Fact is, no player stays on top forever, and Fed has already done an awesome job when it comes to consistency. He's dropped a few paces by now, such should be obvious. But as long as he remains in the top #4, he'll remain a contender for yet another slam title. Never count out a great champion like he is.

That said, even if he will remain at 16 GS titles, Fed fans will have nothing to complain about. I am just very happy that his decline seems to be a very gradual one, and am hoping for some late brilliancy from him in what might well be his last season.

Well, the game is STILL there if not as consistent as before, as is the same weakness, and I would imagine the hunger to win is not the same as around 2004/05. The Forehand is a huge weapon, but the BH doesn't match in pace and depth, and that's where the Djoker teed off on in the 5th set of the USO SF. Watching the replays of that 5th set now, lot of BHs landed short around the service line and serve probably lost pace and direction as well. Maybe Fed just got tired or bored. :-?.
That being said, Fed's been there or thereabouts in the GS, so with a little more luck, he could certainly win.